If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Kotaku)   Anti-gun nuts rant against guy visiting the Bungie studios holding up a Halo prop   (kotaku.com) divider line 115
    More: Sad, Bungie, halos, Military rank, Neill Blomkamp, strip malls, eggs  
•       •       •

6565 clicks; posted to Geek » on 04 Feb 2013 at 11:39 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



115 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-05 09:17:32 AM  

dittybopper: I like that. 'I Don't Know.' That's nice. 'dittybopper, will I win this debate?' Gee, Kazan, I don't know! You know what I'm going to do? I'm going to leave your words right up here for all of Fark to enjoy, giving you full credit of course, Kazan.


admitting you don't know the answer to the question is not a concession of any debate. especially since i just answered that i didn't know how states that require valid drivers licenses for registration of a motor vehicle handle disabled persons who cannot legally drive.

that's not even RELEVANT to the discussion I was having with you.

you do not pass Go!, you do not collect $200. You haven't won a damn thing, and you still haven't even responded to my reply to your asking me what i think better gun control is. It's almost as if you couldn't turn it into an outrage factory since it wasn't banning anything, just restricting and regulating.

You need to learn how to have a discussion without prematurely declaring victory.

GOOD DAY, SIR!
 
2013-02-05 09:55:47 AM  

Vegan Meat Popsicle: dittybopper: Mrbogey: dittybopper: Actually, the way DUI deaths were cut down was by the stricter punishment of the *MISUSE* of alcohol and motor vehicles, not by their mere possession.

Alcoholics abuse the BAC "loophole". They drink less so they don't get an illegal BAC and they drive more carefully. It's totally unfair.

Don't laugh:  That's exactly what MADD has argued, once they got a standard 0.10 BAC enacted across the states.  They didn't disband because their stated goal was accomplished, they went for 0.08 BAC, which is now the standard in the US.  And since they've gotten that, did they just disband?

Of course not.  Now they push for other restrictions.  Some are sensible, like mandatory ignition interlocks for people convicted of drunk driving, others are just punitive, like additional taxes on the beer and wine industry, up to the "per drink" standard that distilleries must pay to close the "fermented only" loophole.

Therefore there should be no laws against driving drunk, right? There are already laws against crashing into property or running someone over, so if a drunk runs someone over, they should just get vehicular manslaughter.

The DUI laws, after all, didn't stop the DUI and the alcohol didn't kill anybody, the driver did, therefore, DUI laws serve only to criminalize responsible drinking and, therefore, none should exist.

Right?


Point is, though, where do you draw the line?

We already *HAVE* a large number of DUI laws.  It's not like there aren't any out there, or that I'm calling for *FEWER* laws.  I'm calling for NO MORE NEW LAWS (both in the case of guns and in the case of DUI laws)

/Rarely drink, and never drive when I do.
 
2013-02-05 10:24:28 AM  

Kazan: dittybopper: I like that. 'I Don't Know.' That's nice. 'dittybopper, will I win this debate?' Gee, Kazan, I don't know! You know what I'm going to do? I'm going to leave your words right up here for all of Fark to enjoy, giving you full credit of course, Kazan.

admitting you don't know the answer to the question is not a concession of any debate. especially since i just answered that i didn't know how states that require valid drivers licenses for registration of a motor vehicle handle disabled persons who cannot legally drive.

that's not even RELEVANT to the discussion I was having with you.

you do not pass Go!, you do not collect $200. You haven't won a damn thing, and you still haven't even responded to my reply to your asking me what i think better gun control is. It's almost as if you couldn't turn it into an outrage factory since it wasn't banning anything, just restricting and regulating.

You need to learn how to have a discussion without prematurely declaring victory.

GOOD DAY, SIR!


timothywlong.com
 
2013-02-05 10:29:10 AM  

dittybopper: Kazan: dittybopper: I like that. 'I Don't Know.' That's nice. 'dittybopper, will I win this debate?' Gee, Kazan, I don't know! You know what I'm going to do? I'm going to leave your words right up here for all of Fark to enjoy, giving you full credit of course, Kazan.

admitting you don't know the answer to the question is not a concession of any debate. especially since i just answered that i didn't know how states that require valid drivers licenses for registration of a motor vehicle handle disabled persons who cannot legally drive.

that's not even RELEVANT to the discussion I was having with you.

you do not pass Go!, you do not collect $200. You haven't won a damn thing, and you still haven't even responded to my reply to your asking me what i think better gun control is. It's almost as if you couldn't turn it into an outrage factory since it wasn't banning anything, just restricting and regulating.

You need to learn how to have a discussion without prematurely declaring victory.

GOOD DAY, SIR!

[timothywlong.com image 300x367]


it's hard to tell the difference between stupidity and sarcasm when in text.
 
2013-02-05 10:38:29 AM  

Kazan: it's hard to tell the difference between stupidity and sarcasm when in text.


This is true.  However, it's the next day, and I'm in a happy place, we hashed out all the issues already, and generally I don't resort to movie quotes unless I'm trying to be funny, but you may not have grasped all of that.
 
2013-02-05 11:02:01 AM  

dittybopper: Kazan: it's hard to tell the difference between stupidity and sarcasm when in text.

This is true.  However, it's the next day, and I'm in a happy place, we hashed out all the issues already, and generally I don't resort to movie quotes unless I'm trying to be funny, but you may not have grasped all of that.


i didn't recognize the first one was a movie quote,
 
2013-02-05 11:17:43 AM  

Because People in power are Stupid: way south: Innocent until proven guilt is sort of the American way. If you wanted it the other way around, you should have gotten on the ship with the rest of the British loyalists.

Fact is there are bad people out there and no question that some of us like to treat them like second rate citizens or arrest them for pre-crimes.

...but the question is how do you want to be treated?

Do you want to be presumed a criminal, having done nothing wrong?
Do you want to have to bargain for your rights from some bureaucrat?
Do you want to be looked at like a potential madman every time you buy any tool or chemical, or even a piece of media?

Because we can easily create this kind of world... But I don't think anyone would enjoy living in it.

/If the overwhelming fear of attack has us locking ourselves up preemptively then we probably won't get freedom or safety as a result.

I've long held the conviction that I should be allowed to own firearms, grenades or nuclear weapons and that the problem isn't with me but with YOU. I know that I will never misuse my arsenal but the potential that YOU will goes up every time somebody else gets possession.


As far as British Loyalty goes -I think it's a little late for that.

Because we can easily create this kind of world... But I don't think anyone would enjoy living in it.

What is this world that you speak of? It seems a lot like the world that freepers are already living in.


The government, the arbitrator of law, only recognizes "Me" as itself. Which means you are the "you" that will suffer the brunt of regulation when you ask for someone else to be legislated against. You can argue that we are all equal but not that you deserve special treatment.

/The freepers (who want less government involvement and less regulation) aren't the ones asking for the loving touch of a boot on their neck.
/the party currently arguing that we should trade another liberty for the promise of safety is the majority democrats.
//and if you want to live under the queens law, its never too late. Flights leave daily.
 
2013-02-05 11:45:52 AM  

way south: /The freepers (who want less government involvement and less regulation) aren't the ones asking for the loving touch of a boot on their neck.
/the party currently arguing that we should trade another liberty for the promise of safety is the majority democrats.
//and if you want to live under the queens law, its never too late. Flights leave daily.


That's so funny freepy. The "majority democrats" have said nothing about a boot on your neck. Freepers like yourself suddenly complain about it when there is a democrat in office and say NOTHING about it while Bush is putting people in "free speech zones".

You are living proof that YOU shouldn't own or possess a weapon. Your childish thoughts represent a stupid, backwoods type of thinking reminiscent of moonshiners raving about "revenuers". If you haven't committed a felony yet, I believe that it is only a matter of time. YOU ARE THE REASON THAT PEOPLE DON'T WANT YOU TO OWN A WEAPON. If you want to "keep yur gunz" stay on the right side of the law. It's odd that you want to make weapons available to people who don't

Of course as pointed out by many others. It's the person not the weapon. You can possibly do more damage by pulling out the brick that holds up your ex-wife's trailer -as you can with your pop's double barreled shotgun. But let's just admit that the only reason that anyone is going to take your cheap ass shiat SKS with a broken safety that goes off when you drop it is because you aren't on the right side of the law. (Even though said SKS probably shouldn't be used until it's fixed.)

Oh yeah, watch out for black helicopters, they are more scary than black people.
 
2013-02-05 03:08:45 PM  

dittybopper: We already *HAVE* a large number of DUI laws. It's not like there aren't any out there, or that I'm calling for *FEWER* laws. I'm calling for NO MORE NEW LAWS (both in the case of guns and in the case of DUI laws)


The problem is that you're not just "not calling for new laws", you're reflexively shooting down every proposal without consideration. As is, apparently, the current standard for gun nut behavior on the issue.

I should hope you can at least recognize that difference.
 
2013-02-05 04:45:06 PM  

Because People in power are Stupid: way south: /The freepers (who want less government involvement and less regulation) aren't the ones asking for the loving touch of a boot on their neck.
/the party currently arguing that we should trade another liberty for the promise of safety is the majority democrats.
//and if you want to live under the queens law, its never too late. Flights leave daily.

That's so funny freepy. The "majority democrats" have said nothing about a boot on your neck. Freepers like yourself suddenly complain about it when there is a democrat in office and say NOTHING about it while Bush is putting people in "free speech zones".

You are living proof that YOU shouldn't own or possess a weapon. Your childish thoughts represent a stupid, backwoods type of thinking reminiscent of moonshiners raving about "revenuers". If you haven't committed a felony yet, I believe that it is only a matter of time. YOU ARE THE REASON THAT PEOPLE DON'T WANT YOU TO OWN A WEAPON. If you want to "keep yur gunz" stay on the right side of the law. It's odd that you want to make weapons available to people who don't

Of course as pointed out by many others. It's the person not the weapon. You can possibly do more damage by pulling out the brick that holds up your ex-wife's trailer -as you can with your pop's double barreled shotgun. But let's just admit that the only reason that anyone is going to take your cheap ass shiat SKS with a broken safety that goes off when you drop it is because you aren't on the right side of the law. (Even though said SKS probably shouldn't be used until it's fixed.)

Oh yeah, watch out for black helicopters, they are more scary than black people.


Bullshiat.  Black helicopters kill far fewer people.  Also, SKS rifles were only cheap in a monetary sense.  Their build quality certainly exceeds that of the average stamped AK or AK knockoff.

Surprised this thread is still sorta active.  Gun control is DOA.  The authoritarian assholes can foam at the mouth all they like, but they can join the regressive anti-choice, anit-gay, and freedom of speech limiting losers in the back room cowering like a bunch of smokers.
 
2013-02-05 05:37:43 PM  

Big_Fat_Liar: Also, SKS rifles were only cheap in a monetary sense.


That is SOOOO not true. Circa 1990 my friend and I went shooting  in the desert. He brought his Chinese made SKS and I brought a Ruger Mini 14. That thing wasn't supposed to be automatic or anything of the like but every so often -you would squeeze the trigger and it would fire off 2 or more rounds.

But hey, it fits your narrative of "People who are against guns don't know about them".

The SKS IMHO is the worst piece of shiat but my tastes in rifles run counter to the freepers here. (For the record, the Mini-14 leaves a lot to be desired).
 
2013-02-05 06:56:12 PM  

Because People in power are Stupid: That is SOOOO not true. Circa 1990 my friend and I went shooting in the desert. He brought his Chinese made SKS and I brought a Ruger Mini 14. That thing wasn't supposed to be automatic or anything of the like but every so often -you would squeeze the trigger and it would fire off 2 or more rounds.


Cheap ammo that goes off from light strikes and a dirty firing pin that jams in the forward position.
It could happen to anybody (that doesn't clean their rifle and buys crappy ammo).
 
2013-02-05 08:01:27 PM  

Kazan: dittybopper: Kazan: it's hard to tell the difference between stupidity and sarcasm when in text.

This is true.  However, it's the next day, and I'm in a happy place, we hashed out all the issues already, and generally I don't resort to movie quotes unless I'm trying to be funny, but you may not have grasped all of that.

i didn't recognize the first one was a movie quote,


It's also been a sad time at work for whenever I make a funny remark that references awesome movies like Airplane, Blazing Saddles, or Fast Tmes at Ridgemont High I get the  blank stare from all the people that need to get off my lawn.  The saddest part is that I get it when I do it with quotes from movies that I consider not that old like Dumb and Dumber or Austin Powers.

I also get the blank stare from Eileen Dover because she is from the other end of the spectrum and is 61.  But she has no excuse except that her head has been up her ass most of her life.  I make jokes and when she is the only one not laughing, she gets pissed at me.

Example:  Bill Clinton came to town a couple of months ago.  We were in my truck when the commercial came on about it and she asked me if I thought it would be cool to go see him.  I told her no.  Not because I don't like Bubba but because I don't think it is of value to go see somebody and all I get to see is this little dot of a human waaaaaaaaay down there on some stage.  Even if it was somebody I absolutely loved I wouldn't do it.  Anyways, the news said the line was all the way up several blocks just to get in and I don't own a blue dress to be able to buck the line.  What did I get?....
cache.io9.com
 
2013-02-05 10:21:17 PM  

ThatGuyOverThere: Cheap ammo that goes off from light strikes and a dirty firing pin that jams in the forward position.
It could happen to anybody (that doesn't clean their rifle and buys crappy ammo).


Or the guy who owned the gun before him tried to modify it by filing down the reciever, or the gun was just poorly made. But you know because you were there -right?
 
2013-02-06 12:36:56 AM  

tbhouston: lol that blk women said he has a tiny penis and smaller balls...i bet she voted for obama purely based on race and if you told her that you voted for mitt purely based on race YOU'RE the racist...

'merika!



Can't they both be racist dipshiats?
 
Displayed 15 of 115 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report